59208 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Notices 

2The report of the OIE scientific commission 

meeting in February 2013 can be viewed at 

http://www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/

Internationa_Standard_Setting/docs/pdf/SCAD/A_

SCAD_Feb2013.pdf. The discussion of the BSE case 

in Brazil appears on pages 13–14. 

3The report of the OIE scientific commission 

meeting in September 2013 can be viewed at 

http://www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/

Internationa_Standard_Setting/docs/pdf/SCAD/A_

SCAD_Sept2013.pdf. The discussion of the BSE 

case in Brazil appears on page 7. 

2012, it was learned that a cow from 

Brazil that was sampled for testing in 

December 2010 tested positive for BSE. 

The commenter noted that 

immunohistochemistry (IHC) tests were 

not completed until June 2012, and it 

was another 6 months before a 

confirmatory test was completed at the 

Community Reference Laboratory in 

Weybridge, United Kingdom. The 

commenter stated that the lack of 

specific information regarding the OIE 

evaluation of the surveillance system 

made it difficult to determine if this was 

a one-time error or a failure of the 

system. 

APHIS agrees that the delays in the 

testing and reporting of the atypical BSE 

case detected in Brazil were 

problematic. In response to these 

concerns, the OIE Scientific 

Commission requested that Brazil 

provide all relevant information for 

their meeting in February 2013. At that 

meeting, the OIE Scientific Commission 

affirmed that the identification of this 

single case of BSE did not put Brazil’s 

or its trading partners’ animal and 

public health at risk because the animal 

was destroyed and no parts of it had 

entered the food or feed chain. 

However, the OIE was also concerned 

about the delay before Brazil sent the 

clinical samples for a confirmatory 

diagnosis and requested more detailed 

information on the procedures for 

processing samples and the 

improvement of the surveillance system 

in the country, so that they could 

further monitor compliance by Brazil 

with international standards.2 At a 

subsequent meeting in September 2013, 

the OIE assessed the additional 

information provided by Brazil.3 The 

OIE was satisfied with the evidence 

submitted but also concluded that Brazil 

should submit the results of the 

proficiency tests conducted for 2013 to 

the OIE as soon as they became 

available. 

In addition, representatives of APHIS 

and the United States Department of 

Agriculture’s Food Safety and 

Inspection Service visited Brazil in 

February 2013 to evaluate the BSE 

laboratory infrastructure, emergency 

response, and BSE-related mitigations at 

the slaughter level. APHIS’ review of the 

epidemiological and laboratory reports, 

including the report from the 

confirmatory tests conducted at 

Weybridge, shows that Brazil’s first BSE 

case was most consistent with the 

atypical form of the disease. In addition, 

as a result of the delays in testing and 

reporting of this case, Brazil’s Ministe ́rio 

da Agricultura, Pecua ́ria e 

Abastecimento conducted audits of the 

laboratories to identify areas for change 

and improvement, and has implemented 

several new procedures to assure the 

timely testing of samples and reporting 

of results. Corrective actions include 

addition of a second lab to conduct IHC 

tests, expansion of testing capabilities to 

include Western Blot, and the 

development of an inter-laboratory data 

management system which will issue 

reports, record improper samples, and 

flag delays in sample receipt, 

completion, and notification of test 

results. Samples will be forwarded for 

IHC testing immediately after the 

immunofluorescence test for rabies is 

completed, rather than waiting for the 

animal inoculation tests to be 

completed. 

We note that Brazil detected a 

suspected case of BSE in a 12-year-old 

cow in April 2014. The Brazilian 

authorities carried out the required 

epidemiological investigation in 

accordance with OIE guidelines. In May 

2014, tests at the OIE reference 

laboratory in Weybridge confirmed that 

it was an atypical case of BSE. 

Brazil still meets the criteria for a 

negligible risk region. In Article 11.5.3 

of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code, 

the OIE requires, among other things, 

that if there has been an indigenous case 

of BSE in a region, every indigenous 

case was born more than 11 years ago. 

The cow in which BSE was detected 

was over 11 years of age. Therefore, this 

most recent case will not affect Brazil’s 

negligible risk status. 

One commenter stated that India 

should be included in the list of regions 

of negligible risk for BSE. 

Our review of information in support 

of concurrence with the OIE designation 

for India is ongoing; we have requested 

the OIE dossier but have not yet 

received it. When our review is 

complete, if the findings support 

concurrence with the OIE designation, 

we will publish a notice in the Federal 

Register announcing our preliminary 

concurrence with the OIE’s designation 

for India and provide the public with an 

opportunity to comment. 

One commenter stated that the United 

States should be included on this list of 

regions of negligible risk for BSE 

because some raw material may be 

exported from the United States and 

then reimported after processing abroad. 

When APHIS assesses the disease 

status of a region, it is to determine 

whether imports can be safely allowed 

from that region. For this reason we do 

not typically include the United States 

in the lists of regions recognized for any 

given disease status. In the event that 

raw material was exported for 

processing, we could allow it to be 

reimported under conditions that would 

be specified on the import permit. 

Therefore, in accordance with the 

regulations in § 92.5, we are announcing 

our decision to concur with the OIE risk 

classifications of the following 

countries: 

• Regions of negligible risk for BSE: 

Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Colombia, 

Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, 

Singapore, Slovenia. 

• Regions of controlled risk for BSE: 

Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Croatia, Nicaragua, 

Taiwan. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 8301–8317; 

21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 

CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of 

September 2014. 

Kevin Shea, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23407 Filed 9–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

[Docket No. APHIS–2014–0004] 

Availability of an Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for a Biological 

Control Agent for Soybean Aphid in 

the Continental United States 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: We are advising the public 

that the Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service has prepared an 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact relative to the 

release of Aphelinus rhamni for the 

biological control of the soybean aphid, 

Aphis glycines, in the continental 

United States. Based on its finding of no 

significant impact, the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service has 

determined that an environmental 

impact statement need not be prepared. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Shirley A Wager-Page ́, Chief, Pest 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Notices 59209 

1To view the notice, the comment we received, 

the EA, and the FONSI go to http://www.

regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014- 

0004. 

1To view the notice, PRA, RMD, and comments 

we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0014. 

Permitting Branch, Plant Health 

Programs, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road 

Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737–1236; 

(301) 851–2323. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

soybean aphid, Aphis glycines, which is 

native to Asia, was found in North 

America in 2000 and has since become 

a major pest. It infested 42 million acres 

in North America in 2003, resulting in 

decreased soybean yields and greatly 

increased control costs. The soybean 

aphid has invaded most soybean 

production regions in North America. 

By 2009, soybean aphid was present in 

30 States and 3 Canadian Provinces. 

The Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS) is proposing 

to issue permits for the field release of 

a parasitic wasp, Aphelinus rhamni, to 

reduce the severity of soybean damage 

from infestations of soybean aphid in 

the United States. 

On May 2, 2014, we published in the 

Federal Register (79 FR 25094–25095, 

Docket No. APHIS–2014–0004) a 

notice 1 in which we announced the 

availability, for public review and 

comment, of an environmental 

assessment (EA) that examined the 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed release of 

this biological control agent into the 

continental United States. 

We solicited comments on the EA for 

30 days ending June 2, 2014. We 

received one comment by that date. The 

commenter stated her opposition to the 

proposed release of A. rhamni, but did 

not provide any substantive information 

or specific concerns. 

In this document, we are advising the 

public of our finding of no significant 

impact (FONSI) regarding the release of 

A. rhamni into the continental United 

States for use as a biological control 

agent to reduce the severity of soybean 

aphid infestations. The finding, which 

is based on the EA, reflects our 

determination that release of this 

biological control agent will not have a 

significant impact on the quality of the 

human environment. 

The EA and FONSI may be viewed on 

the Regulations.gov Web site (see 

footnote 1). Copies of the EA and FONSI 

are also available for public inspection 

at USDA, Room 1141, South Building, 

14th Street and Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except holidays. Persons wishing to 

inspect copies are requested to call 

ahead on (202) 799–7039 to facilitate 

entry into the reading room. In addition, 

copies may be obtained by calling or 

writing to the individual listed under 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

The EA and FONSI have been 

prepared in accordance with: (1) The 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.); (2) regulations of the 

Council on Environmental Quality for 

implementing the procedural provisions 

of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508); (3) 

USDA regulations implementing NEPA 

(7 CFR part 1b); and (4) APHIS’ NEPA 

Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 

372). 

Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of 

September 2014. 

Kevin Shea, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23415 Filed 9–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

[Docket No. APHIS–2014–0014] 

Notice of Decision To Allow Interstate 

Movement of Allium spp. Leaves From 

Hawaii Into the Continental United 

States 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: We are advising the public of 

our decision to allow the interstate 

movement of Allium spp. leaves from 

Hawaii into the continental United 

States. Based on the findings of a pest 

risk analysis, which we made available 

to the public to review and comment 

through a previous notice, we believe 

that the application of one or more 

phytosanitary measures will be 

sufficient to mitigate the risks of 

introducing or disseminating plant pests 

or noxious weeds via the interstate 

movement of Allium spp. leaves from 

Hawaii to the continental United States. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

David Lamb, Senior Regulatory Policy 

Specialist, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River 

Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737– 

1231; (301) 851–2103. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

regulations in ‘‘Subpart—Regulated 

Articles From Hawaii and the 

Territories’’ (7 CFR 318.13–1 through 

318.13–26, referred to below as the 

regulations), the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

prohibits or restricts the interstate 

movement of fruits and vegetables from 

Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin 

Islands, Guam, and the Commonwealth 

of the Northern Mariana Islands to the 

continental United States to prevent the 

spread of plant pests and noxious weeds 

that occur in Hawaii and the territories. 

Section 318.13–4 contains a 

performance-based process for 

approving the interstate movement of 

commodities that, based on the findings 

of a pest risk analysis, can be safely 

moved subject to one or more of the 

designated phytosanitary measures 

listed in paragraph (b) of that section. 

Under that process, APHIS publishes a 

notice in the Federal Register 

announcing the availability of the pest 

risk analysis that evaluates the risks 

associated with the interstate movement 

of a particular fruit or vegetable. 

Following the close of the 60-day 

comment period, APHIS may begin 

allowing the interstate movement of the 

fruit or vegetable subject to the 

identified designated measures if: (1) No 

comments were received on the pest 

risk analysis; (2) the comments on the 

pest risk analysis revealed that no 

changes to the pest risk analysis were 

necessary; or (3) changes to the pest risk 

analysis were made in response to 

public comments, but the changes did 

not affect the overall conclusions of the 

analysis and the Administrator’s 

determination of risk. 

In accordance with that process, we 

published a notice 1 in the Federal 

Register on May 2, 2014 (79 FR 25095– 

25096, Docket No. APHIS–2014–0014), 

in which we announced the availability, 

for review and comment, of a pest risk 

analysis (PRA) that evaluates the risks 

associated with the interstate movement 

of Allium spp. from Hawaii into the 

continental United States. Based on the 

PRA, we prepared a risk management 

document (RMD) to identify 

phytosanitary measures that could be 

applied to the commodity to mitigate 

the pest risk. 

We solicited comments on the notice, 

PRA and RMD for 60 days ending on 

July 1, 2014. We received three 

comments by that date from a private 

citizen, a State department of 

agriculture, and an organization of State 

plant protection agencies. 

Two commenters raised concerns that 

no production, harvest, or post-harvest 

procedures were specified in the RMD 

for the two lepidopteran pests 

(Acrolepiopsis sapponensis and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES